Category A VERTICAL EMPIRE

Some of the most interesting moments in the history of a project may never be recorded on paper, since they happen as a result of casual conversation, or, at least, not in meetings with formal minutes. It is not recorded when it was first suggested to develop Black Knight into a satellite launcher, but judging from the various sketches and proposals that began appearing at the end of the 1950s, the idea took root fairly quickly.

The original Black Knight was not well suited as a satellite launcher. It was simply too small, and could not carry any significant weight in the form of upper stages. Here, for comparison, is some data for Black Knight and various small satellite launchers:

These figures are only approximate, and total impulse is not the only measure of how effective a rocket stage may be, but it gives a good indication. Scout does

not appear to be that powerful, but it was a four stage vehicle, which improved its efficiency as a launcher. Vanguard was not the first American launch vehicle (although it was intended as such); Diamant A was the first French satellite launcher.

Black Knight had originally been designed with the Gamma 201 motor in mind, which had a thrust of only 16,400 lb, limiting its all-up weight to around

14,0 lb. The Gamma 301 had a greater thrust, which meant that in theory Black Knight could now carry more in the way of upper stages. The Gamma motor could have been further uprated to 25,000 lb thrust, but increasing the thrust without increasing the fuel load means reducing the burn time – the total impulse will stay very much the same. The proposed 54-inch Black Knight is getting closer to Vanguard, although with some way to go.

At around this time, RAE were also becoming seriously interested in liquid hydrogen as a fuel. There was considerable experimental work being carried out at RPE, and also the proposed liquid hydrogen third stage for Blue Streak. Black Knight offered a way of building and testing a liquid hydrogen stage, and producing a satellite launcher at the same time. There are various sketches of such vehicles, but most of the work was summarised in a publication from Space Department of RAE entitled ‘The Orbital Capabilities of Black Knight with a Hydrogen-Fuelled Second Stage’ dated April 19631. Four vehicles are studied, with first stage thrusts of 21,600 lb, 25,000 lb, 40,000 lb and 50,000 lb. Version 1 is 36 inches diameter, all the others are 54 inches. It is not made very clear how the thrusts of 40,000 and 50,000lb are to be achieved. Various combinations of upper stage are modelled – a pump-fed or pressure-fed liquid hydrogen second
stage with a solid fuel third stage. Again, what emerges fairly clearly is the inadequacy of Black Knight as a first stage. The most that could be put into orbit using a pump fed second stage is 88 lb, 102 lb, 324 lb and 377 lb respectively. Given that only versions 1 and 2 relate directly to Black Knight, then this is not very impressive.

The conclusions of the report were that:

This study of the possible use of enlarged versions of Black Knight together with a second stage using liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen as propellants indicates that such a vehicle can place a payload of about 80 lb into a circular polar orbit at an altitude of 300 nautical miles. Addition of a third stage using a solid propellant increases the payload to about 375 lb.

The advantages of turbo-pump feed for the second stage engine compared to the use of pressurised tanks is quite clear at the stage sizes considered and the payloads just given are for the turbo-pump version. A pressure-fed version would not be capable even of placing the second stage in orbit and in the three stage version, would substantially reduce the payload.

The results of the trajectory calculations for this class of vehicles show that the second stage thrust should be at least twice the total initial mass of the upper stages and payload. This means that the engine developed for this second stage might well have applications for larger upper stages on other vehicles.

There is, of course, another option: using strap-on boosters. This was not considered in the context of the liquid hydrogen stages, but there is no doubt that it would have improved performance very considerably. On the other hand, the idea of Black Knight with added boosters did arise in an entirely different context – RAE was asked by an official at the Ministry of Aviation in October 1961: ‘What has the RAE done on solid propulsion and what has been done on smaller rockets? (Opinion and any possible objections)’

The context is not entirely clear (the document seems to be the transcript of a telephone call), but Dr Schirrmacher gave a fairly lengthy reply, and part of this reads:

For smaller satellites two solutions are worth mentioning:

Black Knight boosted by two Ravens and carrying a Rook as 2nd stage with a Cuckoo as 3rd stage. One will get 100lb into a 200mile orbit. Present development at Westcott for an improvement of the mass fracture [sic – probably fraction] indicates that the payload could probably be increased by a factor 2 [sic].

It is at the moment not clear whether the Black Knight has to be structurally altered. In this case it is estimated that there are altogether two years of development time with Saunders Roe at £650,000 per year and the probable alteration to the gantry. £1.5M would be a likely sum.2

The ‘two solutions’ mentioned is probably a reference to an RAE report written in January 1961 headed ‘Black Knight as a Satellite Launcher’. It takes as its starting point the 36-inch Black Knight ‘Dazzle’ vehicle, with a thrust of 21,600 lb. It mentions that extra fuel could be carried in the main stage (i. e., Black Knight) but without specifying exactly how much. In true RAE style, the report also tends to the theoretical when it uses solid motors ‘similar to’ the Rook, Raven or Cuckoo. It is also not clear why only two Raven strap-on boosters would be used: using four would be almost as easy and would improve the performance considerably (near the end of the Black Arrow programme, RAE did begin investigating an uprated Black Arrow with four such boosters). The conclusion to the report states: ‘It is clear from these results that, unless exotic fuels are used [a reference to liquid hydrogen], the potentialities of Black Knight as a satellite launcher are very limited.’3

The later 54-inch Black Knight is rather a different, and quite a respectable launcher could be made from it using contemporary solid motors. Such a possibility is explored further in Appendix B.

There was another contender for an all-British small satellite launcher, one with a somewhat curious history. In October 1958, David Andrews of Bristol Siddeley Engines (BSE) produced a brochure for an IRBM fuelled by kerosene and HTP, using four of the large Stentor chambers clustered together in a configuration similar to that of the Gamma 3014. Using HTP rather than liquid oxygen as an oxidant in a missile has very clear and definite advantages, as the HTP can be stored in the vehicle for long periods, and there is no problem with ice etc. As a single stage vehicle, its payload over the 2,000 miles range required was small if not minimal. The brochure does not give any breakdown for the weight of the vehicle, but it does give some very detailed drawings of the engine. On the other hand, lightweight warheads were now a possibility after the negotiations with the US concerning atomic weapons, and, failing that, a small solid or HTP stage could have been added. Two stages had been avoided in the design of Blue Streak owing to lack of experience in staging, but by late 1958 this was hardly a novel technique.

The brochure seems to have produced no official reaction at all, even during the Skybolt crisis when it looked as though Britain might be thrown back onto its own resources. On the other hand, dropping the development of Blue Streak for an entirely new design would have been difficult for many reasons: writing off the work done so far would have been difficult politically, and by then Blue Streak had a strong grip on both industry and the Government. In these circumstances a momentum develops: the new design did not have enough to offer to make the change worthwhile.

The vehicle was a good deal smaller than Blue Streak. The design sketch indicates a diameter of 6 ft and a height rather less than 50 ft – effectively an enlarged Black Knight. This would have made the silo smaller and cheaper. The Stentor motor was already under development for Blue Steel: it might have been quicker and cheaper than finishing the development of the RZ 2. Most important of all, using a non-cryogenic fuel would have increased its credibility immensely. The American Titan II missile, which used storable liquid propellants, and was housed in a silo whose design owed something to the Blue Streak silo design, remained in service until the mid-1980s.

However, it was not to be.

Figure 106. Proposed IRBM design using Andrews did not forget the HTP/kerosene as fuels. idea, however, and later issued

a brochure entitled ‘A Three Stage Satellite Launcher Based on Black Knight and its Technology’5. The brochure is undated, but probably originates from 1962 or 1963. He was an engine designer, and so whilst that part of the brochure is again covered in great detail, there is no General Arrangement drawing, merely an artist’s impression of what the vehicle might look like. A payload of 650 lb to a 300 nautical mile orbit is given, but this is more of an educated guess rather than a figure derived from detailed calculation.

The Bristol Siddeley proposal and the Black Arrow design were costed against each other by RAE with the following breakdown:6

Andrews at Bristol Siddeley had said that his design might cost £10 million, but this was almost certainly a guess rather than a detailed estimate. It rather looks as though the breakdown by RAE is designed to arrive at that figure! On the other hand, a figure of nearly £6 million for the structure and systems for the first stage is absurd. It is a cylinder 6 ft in diameter. The first stage of Black Arrow is a cylinder 2 metres (slightly more) in diameter. Why the Bristol Siddeley first stage should cost 30 times as much as the Black Arrow stage is a mystery.

Then some additional items are thrown in – launch sites, range additions and so on – which brought the grand total thus:

Bristol Siddeley: £11,470,000

Black Arrow: £2,915,000

The costing was done at RAE, and Black Arrow was the design produced by Saunders Roe in collaboration with RAE. If BSE were to have seen these figures, they might have had legitimate grounds for complaint!

Plans for enlarging Black Knight had been under consideration for some time. The liquid hydrogen proposals had sketched out vehicles with larger thrust, but without any detailed plans for how this might be done. During 1962, Saunders

Roe turned their attention to a variety of configurations for six and eight chamber motors. The six chamber arrangement was awkward; an eight chamber version was both more logical and more powerful. The next question was how the chambers should be arranged. One possibility was to have four fixed chambers and four swivelling, but control of the vehicle became more difficult. The question was whether the existing arrangement in the Gamma 301 was powerful enough to swivel two chambers rather than one, and tests showed that it was. The motor bay size had not been fixed, and Saunders Roe gave different configurations with diameters of 57.5 inches, 63 inches and 64 inches. In the end, other considerations fixed the size of the bay, as we shall see.

Arrangement drawing in imperial units – pounds, ft, inches, except one. The diameter of the first stage is 2.0 metres. There is an odd rationale behind this.

Europa 1, the ELDO vehicle, was a combination of Blue Streak plus the French and German upper stages. The French stage, Coralie, had a diameter of

2.0 metres, and so the first stage of Black Arrow was given this diameter as well, so that there was still the possibility of mating Black Arrow to the pre-existing interstage adapter if the opportunity arose – effectively a new version of Black Prince.8 Sadly, the occasion never did arise.

The first stage consisted of engine bay, HTP tank, intertank bay for electronics, kerosene tank and the interstage separation bay. There would be some weight saving if the two tanks shared the same bulkhead, but the decision was taken to separate them to prevent problems if one tank leaked into the other. The HTP tank but not the kerosene tank was pressurised with nitrogen from bottles in the intertank section.

The first stage engine bay had the eight rocket chambers arranged in four pairs of two. Each of the pairs was mounted radially, and were gimballed for vehicle control. Two turbopumps were used to feed the engines. The tanks contained 28,700 lb of propellants, which were consumed in 130 seconds giving a thrust of 50,000 lb at sea level. There was a mixture ratio control keeping the HTP to kerosene ratio to 8.2 : 1.

The separation sequence began as the first stage engines ran short of HTP, and soon after the first stage acceleration fell below 3 g, eight explosive bolts were to blow the two stages apart. At the same time four Siskin solid fuel rockets ignited on the second stage – at that point it would be in free fall, and so the propellants would be literally floating in their tanks. The motors provided the force needed to settle the propellants in their tanks (these are sometimes referred to as ‘ullage rockets’). HTP to start the second stage ignition was held in bottles in the interstage section, being forced in under the pressure of nitrogen gas. When the Siskin boosters had burned out, eight more explosive bolts blow off the interstage section.

The second stage used rocket motors which were almost identical to those in the first stage, except that they had extended expansion nozzles for high altitude operation, where there was a much lower external pressure, and there were, of course, only two motors instead of eight. They consumed 6,725 lb of propellant in 125 seconds for a thrust of 15,300 lb. The engines were fully gimballed for control. There was a fuel ratio control system as in the first stage, and, like the first stage, it shut down when the HTP was exhausted. Both tanks were pressurised with nitrogen.

The second stage diameter of 54 inches was a hangover from the 54-inch Black Knight: ‘the second stage, of 54” diameter, is derived from the vehicle being developed for the defence penetration programme’.9

So the second stage had the motor bay, the HTP tank, an intertank bay, the kerosene tank and the separation bay. The electronics were contained in the sealed intertank bay, and included the flight sequence programmer, the attitude reference unit, telemetry, the tracking beacon, the command destruct receivers, the control system servo amplifiers and power supplies.

After the second stage had exhausted its propellants and cut out, it separated, and the third stage plus payload would coast for around 300 seconds towards the apogee of the transfer orbit ellipse. During this time the vehicle would be stabilised by a nitrogen gas attitude control system. Then six solid fuel motors were fired to spin-stabilise the third stage and satellite to around 20 radians per second or about 200 rpm. Five seconds later the third stage and satellite were released.

The vehicle’s third stage was a specially designed solid propellant motor called Waxwing, with 695 lb of propellant, burning for around 55 seconds and producing an average thrust of 3,500 lb. The motor was very efficient, having a ratio of fuel/total mass close to 0.9. The satellite separated from the empty casing of the Waxwing 120 seconds after its ignition by firing gas-generating cartridges. (It turned out that not even this was a sufficient time: it is thought that some residual thrust from the Waxwing caused it to collide with Prospero after it had separated.) This meant three separate objects were put into orbit: the empty motor casing of mass 77 lb, the motor/payload separation bay of mass 31 lb, and the satellite itself.

The Waxwing was sometimes referred to as an apogee motor since it was not ignited until it was near the top of the sub orbital trajectory provided by the first two stages. At this point the third stage and payload would have fallen back to Earth, but the Waxwing gave sufficient extra velocity to put into the payload and itself into a near circular orbit.

The payload shroud or nose cone was made of magnesium alloy. Designed in two parts, it had an overall length of 11 ft 6 inches and a maximum diameter of 54 inches with a mass of 150 lb. Attached to the second stage, it was jettisoned 185 seconds into the flight, during the second stage burn.

When designing small satellite launchers, it is important to get the design right first time. The payload of Black Arrow was only 132 lb from a total lift-off weight of 40,000 lb. If the vehicle has to be redesigned or modified for whatever reason, and ends up not very much heavier (132 lb on the third stage obviously reduces the payload to zero, but there is more latitude on the lower stages), then the payload becomes zero! 132 lb is only 0.33% of the total vehicle weight. Losing 132 lb from a payload of a ton or more has a lot less impact.

The design having been finalised, the project was put to the Cabinet by Julian Amery, then Minister of Aviation. Again, there was Treasury resistance. A compromise was eventually reached whereby Black Arrow could only go ahead if Crusade and the 54-inch Black Knight were cancelled, with a saving of £4.8 million,10 and Black Arrow was chosen in preference to further re-entry studies.11 In addition, Westland Aerospace, who had taken over Saunders Roe, and Bristol Siddeley, who were to build the new engine, offered to pay a substantial sum, £1 million, towards the development costs. Not surprisingly, Amery greeted this offer with delight. A letter from Westland in February 1965 noted: ‘We expect you to make Management arrangements comparable with the excellent ones you have achieved on the present Black Knight programme. This has been RAE based.’12

However, in retrospect it seems odd that the two projects should conflict: the first stage of Black Arrow would have suited Crusade well. This, however, needs to be seen within the context of British deterrent. By 1964, the UK was committed to the Polaris programme, and Polaris in its original form was considered too small for an extensive system of decoys, and so the later Chevaline system sacrificed one of the three warheads to carry the decoys. When the idea of flight trials for the Chevaline system was considered, Black Arrow was deemed too expensive for the purpose.

The decision to go ahead with Black Arrow was taken in the last days of the Douglas Home Government, and this was to have serious consequences for the project. The incoming Labour Government, not surprisingly, wanted to review many of the major military and technical aerospace projects, and Black Arrow was put on hold. For a Government whose leader won an election with speeches about ‘the white heat of the technological revolution’, the attitude to technology was ambivalent. To put Frank Cousins, a trade union leader with few apparent qualifications for the position, as Minister of Technology was a breath-taking piece of political cynicism on Harold Wilson’s part. To be fair, part of Wilson’s policy was to reduce the number of highly skilled or qualified people working on these projects, so that they could become available for civil work, helping the export drive and so on.

The Treasury got their chance to oppose Black Arrow once again when they prepared a brief for the incoming Chancellor, Jim Callaghan. The brief would have been one of many prepared for him, and this one concerned the space programme and ELDO. (A full version of the brief can be found in Appendix A. It is a very good summary of the Treasury’s position throughout the 1950s and 1960s.) The paragraph on Black Arrow reads as follows:

Apart from some effort within Ministry of Aviation establishments, and a limited amount of research by industry (at government expense) into the basic technology of building satellites, the principal commitment of the UK ‘national civil space programme’ is the development [handwritten: ‘at an estimated cost of £10m.’] of the small satellite launcher based on the military research rocket Black Knight. The decision to go ahead with this development was taken at the beginning of September by the late government. It was justified [handwritten: ‘by the protagonists’] on the grounds that, if Britain is to go in with Europe in collaborative launcher and satellite
development programmes, it was necessary for Britain to have her own ‘research tool’ which would provide her with the necessary technological know-how and an opportunity to test in flight bits of the communications satellites which she will be contributing to the European programme. But no decision has yet been taken on whether the UK should in fact participate in any further European launcher or communications satellite programmes-as stated above, the Treasury would be opposed since to such participation. Until the decisions on this have been taken, it is in the Treasury’s view wholly premature to embark on the development of the United Kingdom small satellite launcher. We recommend therefore that until Ministers have had the opportunity to consider collectively the future course of UK space policy, no work should proceed on a small satellite launcher, and that the project should be regarded as in abeyance. If the Chancellor agrees, we will submit a draft minute for him to send to those of his colleagues who are concerned with these

13

matters.

Figure 113. One of the two Black Knight gantries was rebuilt for Black Arrow. In the distance is the equipment centre, from where the launches were controlled.

To be fair to the Treasury, there was an economic crisis at the time (when is there not?), and Wilson had made great play with the trade deficit in the election campaign – something which rather backfired on him, as it put sterling under further pressure (those were the days of fixed currency rates, with the pound being worth $2.80).

The firms that were to be involved in Black Arrow, Saunders Roe (who were now part of Westland) and Bristol Siddeley Engines, were given three monthly holding contracts merely to keep the project ticking over. The bigger problem was that as Black Knight wound down, then the teams of engineers and designs involved would disperse unless there was something to keep them usefully employed – which a holding contract did not really do. The offer the two firms had made to contribute towards the development costs faded away as the delays dragged out, and whilst more and more defence work was being cancelled.

Review after review took place14, and each time the project was opposed by the Treasury, which did make some valid points. These points were tied up with general British space policy, which was in a muddle. The new Government wished to withdraw from ELDO but to do so with the least political damage. In particular, they were worried not to give any impression of lack of enthusiasm for joint European projects, and so withdrawal from ELDO at the same time as approving Black Arrow was felt to be giving the wrong signals. On the other hand, if Britain did withdraw from ELDO, Black Arrow could be used to counter arguments that Britain was withdrawing from space research altogether. As usual with such contrary policies, inertia ruled.

There were economic reviews too, to determine whether Black Arrow would be ‘profitable’ or not. It is surprising that no one made the analogy with the likes of the Gloster Whittle aircraft: that was certainly not profitable, yet without it, or other test vehicles like it, there would be no jumbo jets. Was the Wright Brothers’ aircraft ‘profitable’? And the papers are not helped by the jargon used by the economists: one phrase to be found in the papers is ‘exogenous stochastic error’ when talking of the development costs of the vehicle, which in the context appears to refer to unpredicted cost overruns with external origins – in other words, it might end up costing more. The reviews also involved RAE in a good deal of work, having to put forward justifications (usually the same ones) for the vehicle almost every few months.

The arguments for Black Arrow were that it gave British scientists experience in space research at minimal cost, to which the Treasury reply was why did the scientists need such experience? The scope for research satellites was felt by the Treasury to be negligible, Black Arrow was far too small to be of any use in launching communications satellites, and there seemed to be few other uses which would benefit the UK. In many ways the Treasury was right, but the project was fought for by the Ministry of Aviation since it was seen as the last chance for British rocketry: if Black Arrow did not go ahead, the British space effort, or at least rocketry effort, would die.

The Treasury’s attitude to the project was summed up in a letter from FR Barratt in Treasury Chambers to Walter Abson at the Ministry of Aviation in April 1965:

It is claimed that the launcher would be of value in giving UK scientists and technicians experience of injecting satellites into orbit and controlling them, and would also enable us to test satellites and components in an actual space environment. But why should we in fact wish to give UK scientists and technicians this experience? What satellites is the UK going to be putting up? And for what reasons? No decision has yet been taken in regard to a programme of communication satellite and development. Ministers have not yet even been invited to consider the possibility of such a programme. Nor has any military requirement for a UK satellite launching capability been stated. The indications are that no such requirement will arise.

It is suggested that possession of a small satellite launcher will enable us the better ‘to compete for contracts for space projects’. I must remind you that the Working Party… concluded that export prospects in the space field were relatively quite small… It might be as well if you were to specify what contracts we are more likely to get if we have a small satellite launcher. I should myself be very surprised if there was anything significant. If there isn’t, I suggest that you would do better to drop this particular argument.

… I do not myself understand how the development of a small launcher on the basis of ‘proven techniques’ will have much relevance to ELDO activities on, say, high energy upper stages. Doubtless you can explain this. In any event, however, Ministers have yet to reach a final decision on UK policy towards ELDO: it is possible, to say the least, that they will ultimately take the view that we should aim to withdraw from ELDO activities. It is also possible that the attitude taken by the Italians and others at the recent ELDO conference will lead before long to the collapse of the organisation. It cannot therefore be assumed at this stage either that ELDO will continue to exist or that, if it does, the UK will continue to participate in it, or will wish to influence its activities.15

Apart from anything else, this is a marvellous example of the Civil Service at work. The sentence ‘Ministers have not yet even been invited to consider the possibility of such a programme’ tends to suggest how much policy was actually made by the senior civil servants rather than by ministers, and there is also a slight implicit suggestion that options are put up to Ministers to be rubber stamped. And then there is the put down in the third paragraph: ‘Doubtless you can explain this.’

It is also worth noting the attitude to ELDO. But, more importantly, this is a very neat summary of the official attitude to most of these projects. When the Ministry of Technology again tried to get Cabinet approval in 1966, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Jim Callaghan, wrote a three page letter of protest reminiscent of those written by Selwyn Lloyd on Blue Streak. Again, the project had to be referred back for further economic studies before it was resubmitted to Cabinet. And the idea of economic reviews, cost benefit analysis, and the like was a new phenomenon. In the 1950s, projects were given a go-ahead mainly on their technical merit. Now the economists were creeping in. This is not intended to be an entirely pejorative comment. The costings of a good number of earlier projects had been completely unrealistic, and a sharper eye on estimates would be welcome. But that is not what the economists were looking at. How do you try to estimate an economic return from basic research? But it was probably the earlier gross under-estimates of earlier projects that made the Treasury so sceptical.

In addition, there were even those in the Space Department at Farnborough who felt that a satellite launcher took up too much of the space budget, to the detriment of other projects. Others in the Ministry of Defence felt that the offer of free launches from the Americans should be used instead, or, even if they did have to pay for them, then it was still cheaper than developing a British launcher. Needless to say, once Britain’s last vehicle was cancelled, the offer of free launches evaporated with it.

There were further financial problems: the Ministry of Defence wanted nothing to do with the funding of the programme. This meant that there might have been potential problems with the use of Woomera, as Black Arrow was, strictly speaking, a civilian programme, and so did not fall under the Joint Agreement between Britain and Australia. And indeed at this time the future of Woomera was being reconsidered – ELDO was moving to South America and thus there would be no more Blue Streak launches, and the number of new missiles under test was shrinking fast. Thoughts turned to alternative Black Arrow launch sites. Barbados was high on the list, but the RAE also looked at launch sites in the UK

Britain is not well situated geographically for satellite launching (but neither was Woomera). Payloads can be boosted by firing the rocket in the same direction of the spin of the Earth: eastwards. But this would mean that the spent rocket stages would fall on Europe, and, not surprisingly, people in Europe might object to this. The only clear path would involve launches almost due north, into polar orbit, and for this, two sites were considered. One was the existing rocket test site on the islands of North and South Uist in the Hebrides; the other was on
the north coast of Norfolk in the region of Brancaster. South Uist was ruled out on grounds both of accessibility and of infrastructure – indeed, it was considered by the Ministry of Aviation to be less accessible than Woomera. Certainly the weather in the Outer Hebrides would have posed a problem. The planned flight paths are shown in Figure 114. The first stage impact points are shown, and the second stage would impact close to the North Pole, north of the 85° parallel.

A team went from RAE to look at the area, and concluded:

No particular site has been

chosen at this time. There Figure 114. The flight path of Black Arrow launched are several areas north of from Norfolk the coastal road which

appear adequate. Ideally a suitable site would be within about five miles of a disused airfield or W. D.-owned site with existing roads and buildings. All that would be required in these circumstances would be the construction of a launch site on the coast line and all the other operations could be conducted at the other site, the two being linked together by microwave and hard wire links.16

A further memo in October 1966 noted that:

For Black Arrow, a site in East Anglia for polar launching has been studied in considerable detail by Space Department, RAE, and found to be technically very attractive. Their itemised estimate for equipment gives a figure of around £1M, to which must be added the complementary civil engineering costs to cover installation and general services. These latter costs are very dependent on the site chosen and at a first broad estimate might amount to as much as £2M, making a grand total of perhaps £3M; a considerable reduction should be available if a suitable disused camp
or airfield became available. Such a site would supersede Highdown for vehicle check-out and static firing purposes, and would have the simplest (and cheapest) supply and maintenance problems.

Polar launching of Black Arrow from N. Uist appears quite feasible, but such a site would not supersede Highdown, and would have substantial technical and logistical disadvantages compared with East Anglia; clearly the remoteness of the area would increase considerably installation, operation and maintenance costs.

The Norfolk launch site looked quite promising until someone realised that the North Sea was beginning to fill up with oil rigs. A chart was rapidly fetched from the Ministry of Power:

…discussions have been held with the Ministry of Power, and a chart obtained showing the position of existing and proposed oil rigs. Although it would be possible to show statistically that the chances of hitting an oil rig would be acceptably low, it seems probable that political considerations would inhibit the establishment of a launch site in Norfolk.

The chances of a spent first stage falling on an oil rig were minute, but given the consequences if one did, the proposal was dropped. The other launch sites being considered were outside the UK (although it is slightly surprising that the Lossiemouth/Inverness area was not considered) and were too expensive to set up. It was back to Woomera.

[Handwritten on the top of the document: ‘This is one of the background of briefs prepared for new ministers in October 1964. ’]

Recommendation.

Some big decisions will be needed very soon about UK space policy. There is to be a meeting of the ELDO Council around the end of the year (it was fixed for mid-December but is now likely to be deferred), at which the UK will be expected to show its hand. All this will be submitted to the Cabinet in due course. In the meantime there is an urgent need to put into cold storage a project authorised at the beginning of September by the last government-namely the development of a small satellite launcher based on Black Knight.

The four aspects of space.

2. The problems of UK space policy fall under four heads:

(i) The scientific space research programme.

(ii) UK participation in European efforts on launchers and communications satellites.

(iii) Military space.

(iv) The so-called “national programme”

To take each of these in turn:

The scientific research programme.

3. This is the programme of scientific investigation into what happens in space: expenditure on it is financed from the so-called “space research budget”, the level of which is now £3*4 m a year and is expected to rise to £6m towards the end of the decade. The biggest single item in this is the UK contribution to the European Space Research Organisation (ESRO) and the development of the UK 3 space research satellite (to be put up by an American launcher). The Treasury is not at this time pressing for the termination of this programme, taken as a whole, or our withdrawal from ESRO.

The European effort on launchers and communications satellites.

4. The UK is a member of ELDO (along with France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria). The ELDO launcher to be developed in accordance with the Lancaster House agreement of 1961 will consist of a UK first stage (the old Blue Streak), a French second stage and a German third stage. The whole launcher was originally estimated to cost £70m. It is now estimated at least £90 m. (of which the UK pay about 40 per cent) and will almost certainly rise further. For all this money (now around £6m a year on the Ministry of Aviation vote) we will get a launcher which is likely to have little, if any, practical use. What has gone wrong, we understand, is that the engineering of the launcher has not been up to the standard of the original design (which was largely cribbed from the US anyway). This means that the ELDO launcher when it is ready to be fired (probably in 1967/68) will not be powerful enough to put a satellite of any size in to a high orbit. Since communication satellites tend to be big and to operate most satisfactorily in high orbits, the launcher as developed under the initial ELDO programme ELDO-A) will not be able to be used to put communications satellites into orbit. (Whether ELDO-A could have any other, not communications, uses is quite uncertain.)

5. A proposal has therefore now been canvassed (it will be put before the meeting of the ELDO council around the end of the year) to develop an apogee motor (a device to give a satellite an extra “kick” into orbit) so as to enable the launcher to put communications satellites into high orbit. The cost of this is estimated at up to £20m (our share, say, £7m). Beyond this the clouds of very much larger projects are already looming. The first such project would be the development of the so-called ELDO-B launcher; this would involve the introduction of liquid hydrogen propellant for the upper stages of the launcher, and development might start around the end of 1965. The cost of this might be of the order of £50-100m. (UK share say around £20-40m.). This could be followed – towards the end of the decade – by ELDO-C, which would be a completely new launcher using liquid hydrogen as a propellant and the cost of which can only be guessed at now (£100-200m.).

6. There is also the prospect of a collaborative European effort on developing and constructing communications satellites to be sold to the world communications organisation – if that organisation will buy them – and the question of whether the UK should participate in this programme will arise.

7. By the beginning of the 1970s, we could be spending up to £30-40m. a year on all these “European” activities, and on the associated “national programme” referred to below. We should have established a big new growing point, both the public expenditure and for the use of fallible human resources (scientists and technologists).

8. The Treasury view is: –

(i) This is not expenditure which we are likely to be able to afford or which has any prospect of bringing us a commensurate economic return.

(ii) We should therefore contract out of all these activities; if Europeans wished to go ahead wasting money on space, that is their affair.

(iii) The crucial decision in our view is on the apogee motor; if we go on with this – the first addition to the initial ELDO programme – we shall find that our room for manoeuvre at later stages will be drastically reduced. At every stage it will be argued-as it was argued when was first set up – that, although large sums and money had been admittedly spent to no purpose in the past, all will be well if we will only spend some more. What is needed in the Treasury view is the decision to go no further in the construction of launchers and communications satellites. But there are political, and perhaps also defence, implications which Ministers have to consider in due course.

Military space.

9. There are some big unresolved questions here. The military are hankering after a defence satellite communications system. The Treasury believe that this is likely to be a great deal more expensive than can be afforded out of a tolerable defence budget, and that, if we were in fact to maintain our military posture east of Suez at all, the military will have to do make do with some relatively inexpensive improvements to the existing means of communication with Singapore etc. But the issues here have not yet been fully explored. At the moment the military are contemplating two possible alternative lines of approach – one to go in with the US on the joint defence satellite communications system which the Americans are likely to set up; and the other to construct some limited defence satellite communication capability of our own. The former course would not be cheap, but the latter would almost certainly be fearfully expensive.

The so-called “national space programme”.

10. Apart from some effort within Ministry of Aviation establishments, and a limited amount of research by industry (at government expense) into the basic technology of building satellites, the principal commitment of the UK “national civil space programme” is the development [handwritten: ‘at an estimated cost of £10m.’] of the small satellite launcher based on the military research rocket Black Knight. The decision to go ahead with this development was taken at the beginning of September by the late government. It was justified [handwritten: ‘by the protagonists’] on the grounds that, if Britain is to go in with Europe in collaborative launcher and satellite development programmes, it was necessary for Britain to have her own “research tool” which would provide her with the necessary technological know-how and an opportunity to test in flight bits of the communications satellites which she will be contributing to the European programme. But no decision has yet been taken on whether the UK should in fact participate in any further European launcher or communications satellite programmes – as stated above, the Treasury would be opposed since to such participation. Until the decisions on this have been taken, it is in the Treasury’s view wholly premature to embark on the development of the United Kingdom small satellite launcher. We recommend therefore that until Ministers have had the opportunity to consider collectively the future course of UK space policy, no work should proceed on a small satellite launcher, and that the project should be regarded as in abeyance. If the Chancellor agrees, we will submit a draft minute for him to send to those of his colleagues who are concerned with these matters.

(F. A. Barrett) 19th October 1964

[From TNA: PRO T 225/2765. Ministry of Aviation space programme: future policy.]

This page intentionally left blank

The strongest political personality that looms out of this story is Duncan Sandys, who made an early reputation for himself during the Second World War in the context of German guided weapons. He was an effective if abrasive Minister, being Minister of Supply in the early 1950s, then Minister of Housing and Local Government. In that context he was also responsible for setting up the Civic Trust. In 1957 he was appointed Minister of Defence by Macmillan, and was arguably the first to get a grip on the Ministry with its divergent Service interests. Before Sandys there had been a rapid turnover of Ministers, who did not have time to stamp their authority on their Ministry. Certainly, he retains a considerable notoriety among aircraft buffs for the 1957 Defence White Paper, with its unspoken ‘no more manned aircraft’ philosophy. Given the speed of the White Paper, he was probably implementing policy that had been already laid out by others, principally Sir Frederick Brundrett, Chief Government Scientist at the Ministry, and also Chairman of the influential DRPC. A further motive behind Sandys’ appointment was to cut the cost of defence in general, and he was not a man to be easily deflected from his objectives. Certainly, he reduced defence expenditure to 7% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at which level it broadly remained for many years. Part of the increased dependence on nuclear weapons was to cut the cost of conventional defence.

Sandys started the ball rolling for Blue Streak whilst Minister of Supply, and he remained a vigorous proponent whilst at Defence. At the end of 1959, he was moved to a new Ministry, Aviation, which took over many of the functions of Supply. It has been asserted that Macmillan appointed him to this post to start the rationalisation of the aircraft industry. It also cleared the way for a new Minister of Defence, Harold Watkinson, to cancel Blue Streak. Watkinson’s ministerial career was relatively short. It is quite likely that the fallout from the cancellation led to Sandys’ sideways move to Colonial Secretary, although this too was a post that would require a man not afraid to take unpopular decisions. As Aviation Minister he was succeeded by Peter Thorneycroft, who had previously resigned from the Macmillan Government as Chancellor over the level of government spending, and it was Thorneycroft who began the Anglo-French talks which later led to ELDO. Thorneycroft later became Minister of Defence.

The Wilson Government, despite its rhetoric of the ‘white heat of technological revolution’ cannot be seen as a government that pushed British technology. Beset by economic problems, research and development (R & D) is an easy target for politicians looking for economies. Few in his Government were scientists or technologists: to make Frank Cousins, a trade union boss of the old school, Minister of Technology was no doubt politically astute, but can be seen as typical of the political cynicism with which Wilson operated. He was succeeded as Minister of Technology by Tony Benn, who seems to have had enthusiasm for but not a great deal of understanding of modern technology.

Crossman, another important Minister of the Wilson Government, writing in his diaries, bemoans time spent in cabinet discussing Black Arrow. Technology had no appeal for him either. But how was Britain going to survive in the latter part of the twentieth century without exploiting advanced technology?

The Wilson Government from 1964 onwards brought a number of economists in to evaluate programmes on a cost-benefit analysis basis (Wilson himself had been an economics don at Oxford). The problem was that research programmes were analysed for their economic benefits, and this is a difficult if not impossible task. One of the points of starting research programmes is that their outcome is not always predictable, since the object of research is to look at matters that are uncertain or unknown.

Surprisingly, the greatest number of files on Blue Streak in the Public Record Office relate to the Foreign Office. This is as a consequence of the attempt to convert Blue Streak into a European satellite launcher. Hence it is not surprising that the Foreign Office were firm advocates of the project irrespective of any technical or economic merit.

The US comes into the picture indirectly, since, with its vastly greater resources, it had covered most of the ground in space and rocket technology before the UK. The warheads that would equip Blue Steel and would have equipped Blue Streak were of American origin, as was a good deal of the technology that went into Blue Streak. Competing with the US in space research or satellite launching was also often thought by those in Government to be pointless, given the progress that had been made in America and the resources available to the American Government. The closeness of the US and UK defence, intelligence and research establishments also often meant that the UK concentrated on certain rather narrow areas (for example, re-entry research) so as to have useful information to trade with the US. (The US would never give information away for nothing, but it would exchange information on a fairly generous basis.)

The SR53 was a relatively small aircraft, only weighing 7,400 lb empty, but 18,400 lb fully fuelled. It was an extremely elegant aircraft, its only drawback in looks being a slightly tubbiness in the fuselage as a consequence of the large amount of fuel that needed to be carried. The wing span without missiles was 25 ft 1 inch, and it was 45 ft long.

The P177

This project grew from the realisation of the limitations of the SR53. It would have been a larger aircraft, with a much more powerful jet engine: the balance of jet and rocket would be almost equal. In addition to the de Havilland Spectre motor, capable of 8,000 lb thrust, it would also have a de Havilland Gyron Junior turbojet, also of 8,000 lb thrust. In addition, it was given a limited Air Interception capability, which extended the range of weather conditions and night time operations. Coincidentally, the Navy was looking for a high-flying supersonic interceptor at the same time, and both Services, rather unusually, concluded that the same aircraft would suit them both. Proposals were sent to the Ministry of Supply in March 1954 and a design contract was placed with the company in May 1955. With remarkably little fuss, development of the P177 began in autumn 1955, and work proceeded steadily throughout 1956.

A memorandum by the First Lord of the Admiralty in April 1956 set out the Navy’s case for the aircraft5:

The P.177 is a single seat high altitude fighter capable of operating at a sustained speed of M = 1.4 in the 40,000 to 60,000 ft height band; its ceiling will be in the region of 75,000 ft and it will be capable of reaching M = 2 for short periods. It will be armed with 2 Blue Jay Mark 3 air to air Guided Missiles, with unguided rockets as an alternative armament. It will be equipped with AI [AI = airborne interception] and will have a limited capacity for night operations…

The P.177 was selected by the Naval Staff because:-

(i) It is one of the very few British aircraft likely to be better than anything American when it comes into service.

(ii) It is the only aircraft required by both the Navy and the RAF.

(iii) Its engine, radar and weapons are already being developed for other air-craft, so that the development costs should be comparatively low.

(iv) It is smaller and cheaper than the N.113 [Supermarine Scimitar] and its early substitution for that aircraft will save production expenditure.

However, two factors now intervened to threaten the project. One was a change in defence policy with regard to manned aircraft, and the second was a need to reduce the UK’s defence spending. With the arrival of Duncan Sandys at the Ministry of Defence, and the resultant 1957 Defence White paper, the RAF version was cancelled forthwith. As the White Paper put it:

Work will proceed on the development of a ground-to-air missile defence system, which will in due course replace the manned aircraft of Fighter Command. In view of the good progress already made, the Government have come to the conclusion that the R. A.F are unlikely to have a requirement for fighter aircraft types more advanced than the supersonic P1, and work on such projects will stop.

Given the extent to which the RAF was threatened, the P177 was relatively small fry, and the P1 interceptor, or Lightning as it became known in service, gave many years of service in a very similar role.

However, the Navy was still very insistent that they needed the P177, and at the same time, Aubrey Jones, who was Minister of Supply, wanted to keep the project going since there was some German interest in the aircraft. A prolonged Whitehall battle then ensued. Sandys told the Navy quite firmly that the aircraft, irrespective of merit or the Navy’s need, could not be afforded. In the same way he told Jones that if the Ministry of Supply wanted to keep the project under way then it would have to go on his budget, not Sandys’.

All this wrangling cannot have helped the progress at Saunders Roe, or the prospect of trying to sell it to the German Air Force. After all, if the RAF version had been cancelled and then the Naval version, this cannot have inspired confidence in the project. In addition, not everyone wanted to sell it to the Germans. Sir Frederick Brundrett, Chief Scientist at the Ministry of Aviation is on record as saying that the German requirement.

.. .was for a high-altitude quick climbing defensive weapon. There was no doubt that they would be best satisfied with a guided weapon and in his view the right course was to interest them in our own Stage 1 and Stage 1 and a half guided weapon developments rather than the P.177.

The Germans did not share his view, however, and in December 1957 the project was finally cancelled.

Would the P177 have lived up to expectations? There is a strong probability it would have done: its smaller sibling, the SR53, did all that was expected of it. The RAF was left with the Lightning, the Navy with nothing. It could be argued that the P177 would have been too specialised for the Navy: it would not have been able to maintain a continuous Combat Air Patrol as its endurance was too limited, although it was intended to fit a probe for air-to-air refuelling. But that was not its function: it was intended to by-pass the patrolling function by its ability to reach high fast targets quickly. The concept was never put to the test, but by the late 1950s it was becoming obvious that jets such as the Lightning with re-heat on the engines could do the job as effectively as rockets.

The Lightning, however, went on to prove its usefulness against the Soviet aircraft that during the 1960s and 1970s attempted to probe British airspace. A manned aircraft does have some advantages over missiles, as the Falklands demonstrated. In reality, both are needed since they are complementary.

The Germans went on to buy Lockheed F-104 Starfighters, as did many other NATO countries. Saunders Roe was a minnow by comparison with Lockheed, and whether as many P177s would have fallen out of the sky as F-104s is also an interesting question. But the most fascinating image is of the P177 in Luftwaffe colours!

The P177 was a good deal less elegant in appearance than the SR53, the rather bulbous fuselage and pointed nose above the air intake detracting from its appearance. It was twice the weight at 14,500 lb empty, and 28,000 lb at extended load. The span was 27 ft, and it was 50 ft 6 inches long. It was within about six months of its first flight6 when the project finally cancelled in December 1957.

A history of the SR53 and P177 projects written by the Air Ministry can be found in Appendix A. [2]

One way round this limitation was to use a high energy upper stage, and so at the same meeting in December 1960 Saunders Roe were asked to consider a liquid hydrogen third stage with 4,500 lb of propellants. The brochure they produced was up to their usual high standard, laying down the problems clearly, and describing the solutions equally clearly. This design and that of RPE has been described in the chapter on rocket motors, so no more about the designs themselves need be said here. The cost of developing a liquid hydrogen stage for the BSSLV was put at between £5.5 million and £7 million.

Saunders Roe did hedge their bets somewhat at the instigation of RAE: the design might have been tailored to the BSSLV, but it was also drawn up with the possibility of mounting it on the French second stage which was now being negotiated. The prolonged European negotiations were slowly getting somewhere, although it would take many more months before any clear shape would emerge. At a meeting in March 1961 at Cowes, the RAE had to tell Saunders Roe that it had now been definitely decided that the second stage would be of French design. Saunders Roe and Bristol Siddeley were to continue with the design for the third stage, with particular emphasis on liquid hydrogen. At the same meeting, Saunders Roe reported that manufacture of the second stage tank structural test specimen was about 25% complete. Although it might seem that the work on the HTP second stage had been wasted, it carried through first to the 54-inch Black Knight and then to the second stage of Black Arrow.

In a further Design Study Progress meeting in July, the chairman noted that the situation was very vague (which, given the ELDO negotiations, was probably an understatement). He hoped that Saunders Roe would play a part in any future design studies and that they would continue to maintain a design study team. At the same meeting, Saunders Roe presented a brochure for the HTP/kerosene third stage, which would involve both high thrust and low thrust stages; a 2V hour period of low thrust was mentioned, and in addition, there was a further report on their liquid hydrogen stage. But this is effectively where work on Black Prince, or BBSLV, comes to a halt. Instead, attention turned to ELDO and Europa.

It might be thought that the creation of ELDO would have finally put the lid on any further thoughts of a BSSLV, but RAE was still doing its best to resurrect the idea. Throughout 1963 and 1964, meetings were being held between RAE and Saunders Roe on ‘medium energy upper stages’. This is a euphemism for HTP stages. In a meeting in June 1963, the chairman of the Working Party, H. G.R. Robinson of RAE, stated that ‘a study of upper stages for Blue Streak were needed as a back-up of the system studies for the E. L.D. O. launching vehicle, in case the latter was not available, or unsuitable’10.

The RAE was considering designs for circular equatorial orbits of either 13,740 km or 36,060 km height – i. e. 12-hour or 24-hour orbits. This would need an apogee motor for a final stage. In a follow up meeting, Saunders Roe were told that they would be given design contracts for ‘An Investigation on British End Stages in combination with the Blue Streak Launcher Vehicle’, and ‘in view of possible ELDO
involvement, RAE recommended that the proposed body diameter be 2 metres (i. e. 6.5 ft.)’11. Although Saunders Roe duly undertook the design studies as requested, they never went past the paper stage. On the other hand, the link to what would become Black Arrow becomes more obvious.

During 1963 and 1964, the design for what would become Black Arrow was evolving. Amongst all the imperial measurements of feet, inches and pounds is a first stage diameter of 2.0 m! This mixing of units not only seems odd but also would seem to have no connection with Blue Streak. However, the ELDO vehicle was being designed with a French second stage, which was also to be of

2.0 m diameter. The idea was then that if the Blue Streak interstage were to be suitable for the French vehicle, it would also be suitable for Black Arrow. In the event, there was a problem, since the Blue Streak side of the interface was much wider; the French stage was to have a skirt that would mate with the lower stage. So this odd metric feature was included in case, as seemed possible in 1963, ELDO did not go ahead, or, for whatever reason, was not a success.

Figure 60 shows a comparison between Blue Streak with Black Arrow mounted on top and Europa. The 54-inch diameter of the payload shrouds may have been a problem for a conventional satellite, although not for a communications satellite, where the payload might be quite small. The other problem was that Blue Streak might have been struggling to lift the 40,000 lb weight of Black Arrow.

But the design for Europa did materialise, and it might then be thought that all further suggestions for a solely British launcher might have died forever. However, there was one enthusiast for space exploration in the House of Commons, the Conservative MP Neil Marten, who asked a Question in the House about the possibilities of the Blue Streak/Black Knight combination. This might well have been a put up job, but it gave RAE the excuse to work the figures for a Ministerial reply, a task they set to work on with eagerness.12

This was in March 1968, when Europa, despite problems with its second stage, still looked viable. Two versions were considered. The first employed the first stage only of Black Arrow, with four of the eight chambers and one of the turbopumps deleted. The payload estimate was for 1,800 lb in a 200 NM polar orbit (750 kg at 500 km); however, extended nozzles on the motors (as in the Black Arrow second stage) resulted in an improvement on this of ‘some 20% to 25% giving a performance appreciably greater than ELDO A’. Adding the third stage of Black Arrow – the Waxwing motor – would increase payloads ‘by about
200 kg’. This would put the maximum payload up to 1,100 kg. Development costs were put at £1 million, and the unit cost per vehicle at £1.5 million.

A follow-up note gives some interesting comparisons between ELDO A and the Blue Streak/Black Arrow combination.

* from stage itself (m/s) ** from stage when used as part of multi-stage vehicle

This shows the potential of a Blue Streak/Black Arrow combination. It also shows up very clearly the structural efficiency of Black Arrow as opposed to the ELDO second stage.

Equally interesting are the costings, for what they are worth:

HSD for work on Blue Streak:

Rolls Royce for work on Black Arrow motor: Westland – Black Arrow modifications Motor bays

Ground equipment modifications:

Modifications at Woomera say Total

[sic – total is actually £860k!]

Cost of first flight vehicle: Blue Streak £1000k

Black Arrow £400k – say £1500k total.

To carry out the modifications and launch one test vehicle for £2Уг million seems a touch on the optimistic side.

There were, of course certain snags. To do this in parallel with Europa would have been politically unacceptable (but it would have been interesting to see the reactions if the Blue Streak/Black Arrow combination had reached orbit by 1970). There was also the question of payload – but the Perigee Apogee System (PAS) design could have been adapted from ELDO to give a geostationary capability.

At around the same time, Saunders Roe produced their own brochure for a Blue Streak/Black Arrow combination. The skirt to the engine bay was flared out to match the Europa interface, as originally intended. They went through all the permutations with their usual thoroughness, considering eight chamber and four chamber variants, two – and three-stage versions, and also reviving the liquid hydrogen third stage possibility. Their payload calculations were on the optimistic side, however, since they estimated that Blue Streak and Black Arrow together could put as much as 3,000 lb in low earth orbit, and even a few hundred pounds in a geosynchronous orbit.

It is interesting to note that Saunders Roe were obviously thinking of communications satellites as an application for the launcher. Under the payload shroud the satellite is sketched with two solid fuel motors: one which would convert a low Earth circular orbit into a highly elliptical geotransfer orbit, and the second of which would then act as an apogee motor to convert the elliptical orbit into a circular geosynchronous orbit. In this context, it should be noted also that although the US was prepared to sell launchers to other countries, this offer was subject to considerable restriction and would almost certainly not have included commercial communications satellites. Britain’s military communications satellites, Skynet, were launched by the US only as a result of the close military ties between the two countries. Thus Britain might have been able to produce a low cost launcher for communication satellites – but not a very powerful one.

However, there was a considerable divergence in views between the establishments and the Ministries. The RAE and its associated establishments were constantly producing ideas based on Blue Streak, yet it was obvious that the Ministry of Technology, as the Ministry of Aviation had then become, was firmly set against any idea of a British-based launcher, and certainly, as already mentioned, it would have been politically unacceptable whilst ELDO was still in existence. It would also have been financially unacceptable as far as the Treasury was concerned.

Single stage. Launched 7 February 1961 at 22:16. Apogee 427 miles.

BK13 was a single-stage vehicle with a double cone eroding head similar to BK05 and BK06 except for the substitution of a low-power telemetry beacon plus a tape recorder in place of the normal telemetry sender (BK05) or tape recorder (BK06), the use of a cine camera for filming the head wake during re­entry, and the deletion of the recovery parachute system. As in BK07, further measurements were made in the motor bay to investigate base heating and pressures.

Propulsion was good and a re-entry velocity of 10,870 ft/second was achieved at 200,000 ft. The flaps over the base bleed holes opened before take-off and closed later as in BK07. The kerosene level sensor and HTP probes worked and
propellant usage in flight was determined. The head separation, turnover and spin systems were faultless, as were the pyrotechnic flashes on re-entry.

Unfortunately, due to an incorrect setting of the switch, the tape recorder in the head started too soon and the tape had run out before re-entry; for the same reason the camera in the head did not record the re-entry wake. The durestos nose cone and materials specimens were recovered and erosion measurements were made. The electronic flashes were observed clearly but the tracking lamps were not seen.

R0 – 28 June 1968

R0 was launched on a trajectory to the north west, towards Talgarno in Western Australia. The first two stages were live; the third stage was inert.

The launch procedure was that the vehicle was held down on the launch pad by a ball and claw mechanism, the engines were started, and when full thrust was reached, which took around 4 seconds, the vehicle was released. But as soon as it cleared the pad, the vehicle immediately developed a large rolling oscillation. The cause of the fault was an open circuit in the feedback loop that controlled one of the pairs of motors: a wire had probably broken.

At about 64 seconds into the flight, the control system could not cope and the vehicle tumbled. One of the payload fairings broke away, followed by the payload, then the Gamma 8 first stage motor stopped working. The vehicle was destroyed by ground command when it was at an altitude of 9,000 ft on its descent.

The response of the motor pair concerned was normal up to about 4.1 seconds after opening the first stage engine start valve, 0.5 seconds before the release jack was opened. Loss of the signal meant that the pair of motors concerned would swing to their full extent and back again on receiving a correction, instead of the small deflection needed to put the vehicle back on to its correct course.

This can be seen quite clearly in the film of the launch, where one of the set of rocket exhausts can be seen swinging from side to side. Figure 115 shows the vehicle a few seconds after lift-off, and one of the sets of exhausts can be clearly seen pointing to one side.

Eyewitness statements were taken from those who had been watching the flight.

One, by Ken Smith of RAE, reads as follows:

Ignition was seen to occur just after zero time, and the vehicle lifted off as expected a few seconds later. The ascent appeared normal, and the downrange pitch programme was clearly occurring. Just after the time count of 60 seconds, two or three glowing fragments were detached and fell away from the ascending vehicle.

Immediately afterwards, the clean flame pattern changed to an intense white smoky trail. The vehicle pitched violently, then appeared to recover to its original path, but the rate of ascent diminished. Then tumbling began; the vehicle turning slowly nose over tail several times and beginning to descend. The intercom call was made ‘vehicle descending’. The FSO announced that break-up would be initiate when the vehicle reached 9,000 ft on the descent. After a short interval, the vehicle still falling and tumbling, he announced break-up ‘NOW’. An instant later the vehicle disintegrated in a bright luminescent explosion. The loud sharp detonation was hard several seconds later.17

There is a reference made in a file in the Public Record Office1 to a telephone conversation in which the RAE was asked by an official at the Ministry of Aviation in October 1961:

What has the RAE done on solid propulsion and what has been done on smaller rockets? (Opinion and any possible objections).

The context is not entirely clear, but Dr Schirrmacher of RAE sent a fairly lengthy reply, and part of this reads:

(b) For smaller satellites two solutions are worth mentioning:

Black Knight boosted by two Ravens and carrying a Rook as 2nd stage with a Cuckoo as 3rd stage. One will get 100lb into a 200mile orbit. Present development at Westcott for an improvement of the mass fracture [sic – probably ‘fraction’] indicates that the payload could probably be increased by a factor 2 [sic].’

Dr Schirrmacher was referring to a report which was written at RAE in January “ 1961 as part of a more general paper on the

possibilities of using Black Knight as a satellite launcher, and the study was based around what might be called the ‘Dazzle’ Black Knight – i. e., the 36-inch vehicle with a lift-off thrust of 21,6001b.2

It is also interesting to note, in the Black Knight context, that Saunders Roe’s Aerodynamics Department and Computing Department had produced a joint report of a vehicle which they christened LOVER, standing for Low Orbit Vehicle for Experimental Research. This was

nothing more than the 54-inch Black Knight together with the Kestrel motor (but pointing upwards). Somewhat optimistically, it concludes that

The proposed satellite launcher using a 4′ 6" diameter Black Knight as a first stage and a “Kestrel” powered second stage can be used to inject a small satellite into orbit at an altitude of between 100 and 200 n. miles.. .3

The 54-inch Black Knight is a rather more plausible contender for a satellite launcher than original 36-inch version, and in the context of what might have been possible in 1963, some performance figures would be helpful:

Why 1963? This was the time when the design which would become Black Arrow was evolving. Instead of Black Arrow, this section will consider the possibilities of a launcher using Black Knight as a central core and adding assorted solid motors, both as strap-on boosters and as upper stages.

Adding solid fuel boosters to Black Knight:

Initial Thrust Total impulse (lb) (lb. seconds)

36-inch Black Knight + 2 Ravens 36-inch Black Knight + 4 Ravens 54-inch Black Knight + 2 Ravens 54-inch Black Knight + 4 Ravens Black Arrow

The total impulse could be increased even further by ‘stretching’ the Black Knight stage – that is, increasing the size of the fuel tanks. The Raven is the most suitable, since it has a relatively long burn time, so that the central core has had time to burn off some of its fuel. Total impulse is, of course, not the only criterion by which a rocket motor should be judged, but it is useful in this context as a rough and ready guide.

There would be very little extra development work needed to be done, since by 1961, the Raven, Rook and Cuckoo were fully developed – the Raven and Cuckoo were in use on the Skylark rocket, and the Cuckoo II was also the second stage for the 36-inch Black Knight. The Kestrel was to have been the second stage for the 54-inch Black Knight, and so if we have the 54-inch Black Knight, we also have the Kestrel. Waxwing is the only rocket not available in 1963, since it was developed specifically as the apogee stage for Black Arrow.

In a launcher which has several stages, it helps if they are well matched in weight. For reasonable performance, very roughly the first stage might be around 60% of the all up weight, the second stage perhaps 30%, and the third stage 10% or so. They also need to be matched in thrust: if the first stage only has a limited thrust, it cannot lift the upper stages. One of the points of the strap-on boosters is to give that extra thrust, so that when they have burnt out, the main stage has used up enough fuel to carry on by itself.

Another consideration is geometry, and this is where the idea of using the Rook and Cuckoo as second and third stages falls down. The Rook had a diameter of only 17 inches (at this time, 17 inches was the largest solid motor made in the UK). The Kestrel would have had a 24-inch diameter. The largest motor made in the UK was the Stonechat at 36-inch, but this would have been too heavy to use as a second stage. Larger diameter solid fuel motors were produced on an experimental basis at Westcott in the 1960s. Bristol Aerojet Ltd (BAJ) produced high strength steel tubes using the helical welding process, and Westcott developed the propellant charge design. Tubes up to 54 inches in diameter were produced, and one such tube was filled and fired at Westcott.4

Fitting a 17-inch motor onto a 54-inch stage would have been awkward, but the bigger limitation would have been in the size of satellite carried. Even the smallest satellite would have been more than 17 inches across, and so an extremely bulbous fairing would have to be fitted on top. Even with a Kestrel, the geometry looks awkward, as the diagrams in Figure 121 demonstrate.

The Rook would seem to be better than the Kestrel on grounds of total impulse, but was less structurally efficient. On the other hand, there is no reason why two or even three Kestrels could be used – two Kestrels give nearly the same impulse as the Rook, they are structurally more efficient, and staging improves that efficiency.

In either case, the payload would be in the region of 200 lb or so – possibly more. In fact, the payload could be increased further: the total mass of the launcher would have been in the region of 29,000 lb or so, whereas the lift-off thrust was 75,000 lb. As mentioned, this gives the possibility of ‘stretching’ the Black Knight stage by lengthening the tanks to carry more fuel. By the time the boosters have burned out, the extra fuel will also have been burned off. This is quite efficient – the extra structural weight added is merely that of the thin walled tank.

Why is this a good deal cheaper than developing Black Arrow? There is very little in the way of development costs. By the time of the cancellation of the re­entry experiments, BK26, the first 54-inch Black Knight, was quite well advanced in construction. The development costs of the Black Knight and the Kestrel would already have been absorbed by the re-entry programme. One of the major development costs for Black Arrow was the design and testing of the Gamma 8 and Gamma 2 motors. Developing more capable solid fuel motors is a good deal cheaper.

So, it might well have been possible to develop a Black Knight launcher costing not much than around £2 million which might have been able to put 200­300 lb into orbit, compared with Black Arrow costing £10 million… and which could put around 150 lb into orbit.

1 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1567. ELDO satellite launcher system.

2 Black Knight as a Satellite Launcher. AP Waterfall, Guided Weapons Department, RAE. 18 January 1961 (Science Museum Library and Archive).

3 Black Knight LOVER, Saunders Roe, May 1963.

4 Moore PO, 1992. Stonechat, JBIS, Vol 45, pp.145-148.

This page intentionally left blank

[1] R. Maudling. Memoirs. (1978). Sidgwick & Jackson Ltd.

2 The National Archives (TNA): Public Record Office (PRO) DEFE 7/2245.

Development of Blue Streak.

3 TNA: PRO DEFE 13/193. Development of Blue Streak missile.

4 TNA: PRO DEFE 7/2245. Development of Blue Streak.

5 Ibid.

6 TNA: PRO AVIA 92/24. Blue Streak: correspondence leading to the Cabinet decision to cancel as a weapons system.

[2] WJ Boyne, Clash of Wings. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.

2 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/546. SR53 Finance and Policy. The details of the proposed improvements are outlined in a series of papers in this file.

3 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/287. F138D Saunders Roe rocket interceptor aircraft for RAF.

4 TNA: PRO BT 233/40.

5 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/649. Saro rocket interceptor: RN aircraft NA 47.

6 Ibid.

[3] TNA: PRO AVIA 65/91. Propelled air-to-surface missiles for ‘V’ class bombers: application to Vulcan aircraft.

2 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1687. Blue Steel. Development programme.

3 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/91. Propelled air-to-surface missiles for ‘V’ class bombers: application to Vulcan aircraft.

4 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1289 Blue Steel. Main propulsion unit.

5 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1467 Blue Steel. Management Board.

6 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1468 Blue Steel. RAE Study Group.

7 Ibid.

8 TNA: PRO AIR 20/12143. Proposals for OR 1149.

9 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1697. Stand off bomb, OR 1159: research and development.

[4] TNA: PRO AIR 2/13206. ATOMIC (Code B, 12): Long range surface to surface weapons.

2 TNA: PRO AVIA 48/7. Rocket Research Panel: minutes of meetings.

3 TNA: PRO DEFE 7/2245. Development of Blue Streak. The Operational Requirement for a Medium Range Ballistic Missile system. Note by DCAS 9 August 1955.

4 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1193. Warhead for a medium range missile: Air Staff requirement OR 1142 Orange Herald (DAW plans action). This file is the source for all the quotes in this section.

5 Ibid.

6 TNA: PRO AIR 2/13745. Warhead for medium range ballistic missile Blue Streak (OR 1139 and 1142).

7 TNA: PRO AIR 20/10299. Ballistic missiles: minutes of Joint US/UK Medium Range Ballistic Missile Advisory Committee and related papers.

8 TNA: PRO AVIA 6/17210. Application of solid propellant motors to medium range ballistic missiles. Technical Note RPD 156. WR Maxwell, December 1956.

9 TNA: PRO AVIA 54/2141. Blue Streak development: A1 Coordination Panel; minutes of meetings.

10 TNA: PRO AVIA 54/2146. Blue Streak development: Joint US/UK Advisory Committee; technical correspondence.

TNA: PRO DEFE 7/2245. Development of Blue Streak.

[5] TNA: PRO AVIA 68/23. Work supporting development of an underground launching system for Blue Streak. RPE Technical Note No. 170. BWA Ricketson and ETB Smith.

2 Ibid.

[6] was surprised and encouraged today that amongst those who are advising both the PM & the Chancellor there is a pronounced feeling that if we are to go on with the deterrent it should only be on the basis of Polaris.

[7] TNA: PRO AVIA 65/352. Space research vehicle design and performance: potential of reconnaissance satellites.

2 TNA: PRO DSIR 23/25364. Preliminary assessment of an earth satellite reconnaissance vehicle (RAE TN GW 393).

3 TNA: PRO AVIA 6/19852. Technical report G. W.455. The Use of Blue Streak with Black Knight in a Satellite Missile. D. G. King-Hele and Miss D. M. Gilmore. May, 1957.

4 TNA: PRO AIR 20/10573. Blue Streak: possible use as satellite launcher.

5 Science Museum Library and Archive

6 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/351. Space Research Vehicle Design and Performance: British Studies.

7 Saunders Roe Technical Publication 435.

8 TNA: PRO AVIA 66/4. Blue Streak as a satellite launcher.

9 TNA: PRO DEFE 7/1397. UK space research programme. 19 December 1960

10 RAE Communication Satellite Study. Working Party No. 2 meeting of 10 June 1963. (Science Museum Library and Archive)

[8] RAE Communication Satellite Study. Working Party No. 2 meeting of 17 June 1963. (Science Museum Library and Archive)

12 TNA: PRO AVIA 13/1351. Space policy: Black Arrow review 1967.

13 TNA: PRO DSIR 23/39853. Blue Streak/Centaur launcher.

1 TNA: PRO AVIA 66/4. Blue Streak as a satellite launcher.

Ibid. 3 Ibid.

Ibid.

5 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1708. Blue Streak satellite launcher development: European co­operation.

6 TNA: PRO AVIA 66/7. Blue Streak satellite launcher project: Pt B.

7 Ibid.

8 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1708. Blue Streak satellite launcher development: European co­operation.

9 TNA: PRO AVIA 66/4. Blue Streak as a satellite launcher.

10 Anglo-French technical proposals for the development of a satellite launching vehicle system / Propositions techniques Franco-Britanniques pour la mise au point d’un porteur de satellite; document elabore par le Ministere de l’aviation du Royaume-uni et le Ministere de l’air francais.

[10] TNA: PRO AVIA 66/8. Blue Streak satellite launcher project: Pt C.

Historical Archives of European Union, Florence, ELDO 118. Technical Definition of the Initial launching System. October 1963.

13 TNA: PRO EW 25/52. Review of UK space policy including European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO).

14 Ibid.

15 HAEU, Florence, ELDO 828. Alternative Development Programme.

16 TNA: PRO T 225/2765. Ministry of Aviation space programme: future policy.

17 TNA: PRO EW 25/52. Review of UK space policy including European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO). FR Barratt, 26 March 1965.

18 HAEU, Florence, ELDO archives.

19 TNA: PRO AVIA 92/259. UK withdrawal from European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO).

20 Private communication.

21

Ibid. 23 Ibid.

[11] This is the mean thrust (in the original French ‘la pousee moyenne – 550 kN’ as opposed to ‘la pousee maximum – 630 kN’).

[12] to geostationary orbit

As can be seen from the figures for the estimated performance, the boosters produce a useful payload increase – but even 300 kg is distinctly inadequate for a

[13] HAEU, Florence, ELDO 80.

2 Design Studies On A High Energy Third Stage For The European Launch Vehicle. Dietrich Koelle, May 1963. (Private collection.)

3 TNA: PRO DSIR 23/31973. Flight trial of F1 of EUROPA 1 (ELDO satellite launcher system – first stage). RAE TM Space 45, August 1964.

4 HAEU, Florence, ELDO. F6/1 launch, September 1967.

5 HAEU, Florence, ELDO archives.

6 Ibid.

7 HAEU, Florence, ELDO 3569. E. L.D. O. B1 & B2 Vehicles Oxygen/Hydrogen Upper Stages. Rolls-Royce Thrust Chamber Design Study to E. L.D. O. Contract CTR/17/7/10. February 1967.

8 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1567. ELDO satellite launcher system.

9 HAEU, Florence, ELDO 3515.

10 HAEU, Florence, ELDO 3035.

[14] HAEU, Florence, ELDO 1561. Low cost launchers – conclusions of the EUROPA II AD HOC group. 30 May 72.

12 HAEU, Florence, ELDO 4287. Europa IIIC with 4 RZ 2 engines.

[15] TNA: PRO AVIA 92/128. Policy and financial control of Westland Aircraft Ltd on Black Knight project,

2 TNA: PRO AVIA 48/58. Black Knight: trials. Preliminary Post Firing Meeting Friday October 3rd, 1958. Guided Weapons Department, RAE.

3 TNA: PRO AVIA 13/1268. ‘Black Knight’: hot tests on inertia navigator head. Summary of Direct Kinetic Heating Measurements on Black Knight, Dommett RL and Peattie IW. Guided Weapons Department RAE, 3 November 1961.

4 Interim Report on the Range Safety Proving Trial. Space Department, RAE. 2 January 1964. (Science Museum Library and Archive)

5 TNA: PRO DSIR 23/35658. Project dazzle Pt 5.

6 Minutes of a meeting at Osborne House 19 July 1962. (Science Museum Library and Archive.)

7 TNA: PRO AVIA 65/667. ‘Black Knight’ project: policy and financial control. PD Irons of Saunders Roe to WG Downey at the Ministry of Supply, 30 October 1958.

8 TNA: PRO T 225/2124. Space and general guided projectile research: Black Knight test vehicle; Ministry of Aviation firing programme. Memo by JA Marshall, 2 January 1961.

9 Ibid.

[16] If RAE had decided to go ahead with Crusade and the 54-inch Black Knight, but adapted as a launcher using solid motors as described earlier. Now let us imagine a timeline thus:

[17] If the French proposal for dropping ELDO A and going straight to ELDO B had won the day in 1965. One can sympathise to some extent with the Government’s position on ELDO, but again it lacked the courage of its own

[18] TNA: PRO AVIA 65/1851. WS-138A: Skybolt policy.

2 Ibid.

3 TNA: PRO DSIR 23/ 31835. Performance capability of Black Knight rocket in various roles (RAE TN Space 60).

[19] TNA: PRO AVIA 66/7. Blue Streak satellite launcher project: Pt B.

2 TNA: PRO CAB 129/127. Space Policy. Report by the Official Committee on Science and Technology. November 1966.

Whilst the major policy issues were the province of the politicians, the day-to­day or month-to-month work was carried out by officials at the various Ministries. One of the most influential, by virtue of his post, was CGWL, or Controller of Guided Weapons and Electronics at the Ministry of Supply and its successors. For almost all the period, with a break of two years, Sir Steuart Mitchell held the post. From the Ministry papers he appears to be a sensible and capable administrator. Dr Robert Cockburn filled the break.

However, delving deeper into the Ministries, one drowns in a soup of alphabetic titles: in the RAF there was VCAS (Vice Chief of the Air Staff, who dealt with nuclear matters); DCAS, the Deputy Chief; DCAS (OR) Deputy Chief of Air Staff (Operational Requirements). There was DRAE (Director of the Royal Aircraft Establishment); DDRAE (his deputy); DAWRE (Director of the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment) and DDAWRE, his deputy. Then there are all the Ministry and Establishment departments with their heads: Guided Weapons, Space Department, and so on. Ministries have Private Secretaries (PS), Permanent Under Secretaries (PUS), and varieties of subordinate secretaries. It was part of their job to turn policy into hardware. But they were also responsible for the papers that went to Ministers, and, as a result, a good deal of the policy was made at a lower level than is often supposed.

If Britain had built the V bombers as strategic bombers which were capable of launching a nuclear attack, then it was logical to think that the countries threatened would take care to defend their cities against such an attack. In the Second World War, this had been done by means of night fighters equipped with radar, searchlights and anti-aircraft guns. But a new weapon was appearing on the scene: the guided missile, such as the Bristol Bloodhound, which would be deployed from 1958 onwards. Bloodhound was radar controlled, used a ramjet engine and had a range of up to 50 miles. There were even proposals at one stage to equip them with nuclear weapons to increase their destructive power. But threat implies counter-threat, and the Air Staff was working on the assumption that from about 1960 onwards the V bombers would be unable to penetrate the

Moscow air defences – in other words, that Moscow would be protected by guided weapons similar to Bloodhound.

The next question was then how to deliver the Bomb from the time the defences became too formidable for the V bombers to penetrate. In the early 1950s, ballistic missiles were not yet an option. Britain had invested heavily in the V bomber force, so that any ideas to prolong their active life would be very welcome. Hence the idea of a ‘flying bomb’ evolved. Initial ideas in the late 1940s had centred on a system called Blue Boar, which was a television guided glide bomb. This proved too limiting, since cloud and bad weather could obscure the television picture, whilst the radio link between missile and aircraft could easily be jammed. Instead, thoughts turned to a longer range powered device. This was not a flying bomb in the V1 sense, whose guidance had been extremely limited, but one that would be able to deliver its payload with considerable accuracy. Nor would it be a cruise type missile, since the technology for long- range guidance, terrain following radar or satellite navigation also did not exist at that time. Instead, inertial guidance would be used, which could be accurate enough at relatively short ranges. The missile would be released from the aircraft, immediately climb to a considerable height, cruise at high speed – around Mach 2 or so – then dive down onto the target.

The theory was all very well, but in 1954 reality was something else. Britain was still working on its first fusion bomb, so it was difficult to estimate what payload size and weight would have to be carried. The next problem was the inertial navigation. As the US was discovering with Snark, Matador and Regulus, navigation over considerable distances was a problem. This was one of the reasons why a range of 100 nautical miles was chosen for Blue Steel. The problem was made more difficult since it would be launched from a moving aircraft whose own position might be uncertain. A further problem with cruise type missiles is their relative vulnerability to enemy defences unless they fly at a very low level, which was, again, not possible in 1954. Hence OR 11321 specified a speed of Mach 2.5 at 70,000 ft or higher for the vehicle, although in 1954 supersonic speeds were an area still fraught with unknowns, and supersonic wind testing was still very difficult. Yet another problem was that at these speeds the skin of the vehicle would start heating up as a result of friction with the air. Aluminium airframes would not be suitable at high Mach numbers (this is one of the reasons why Concorde and similar aircraft are limited to around Mach 2.2) and the only real alternative was stainless steel, which was difficult to work with. This was more unknown territory.

All of this was summed up by a memo from the Ministry of Supply, appropriately enough on 5 November 1954, by saying:

Present estimates are that medium range GW defences will make it excessively dangerous for the V bombers to fly over, or within about 50 miles of the target in I960… The requirement is therefore for a flying bomb which will have its maximum use between 1960 and 1965. It is expected that a fusion warhead will be available by 1960 and it seems generally agreed that the bomb should be designed to carry this warhead.2

[GW = Guided Weapons. In this context, the reference is to surface-to-air missiles.]

The time period is significant – it is assumed that by 1960, the V bombers will no longer be able to attack the target directly. The next assumption is that by 1965 some other form of delivery will have taken over, although this is still too early for the Air Staff to be thinking specifically of ballistic missiles.

The early files note that in some respects the project is almost equivalent to building a fighter aircraft. It would have no instruments and so on, but certainly was aerodynamically novel, and with an autopilot connected to the inertial navigator in place of a human pilot. As a further minute of November 1954 put it:

This bomb is indubitably much simpler than a fighter aircraft in the range of equipment that has to be provided. On the other hand it is a big step to go from the present speed range to Mach Numbers of 2 and above and again in comparison with the development of a manned fighter, it is to be expected that the production of the many vehicles required for firing trials will lengthen the development time.